The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-10-01
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

1
the most distinguished official. There are
| hereditary kings and emperors who have more
absolute and arbitrary power, and who can
surround themselves with of mock
heroism in peace and of pomp and circum-
stance in war; but the elective chief of sixty
millions of people, the chosen head of great
republic, occupies incomparably higher
| position than the accidental representative of
| any dynasty or the fraudulent wearer Of any
| crown. If the Constitution and government
! of the United States stand before the world
to-day in the hundredth year of their success
full operation the best expression of political
| wisdom known among men, the President of
| the United States as the chief executive of this
| greatest of governments, elected under the
forms of law, is surely deserving in his official
| capacity of the respect of all his countrymen
| When it comes to a question of honoripg the
office there is no reason for partisanship or
party lines. Let us, therefore, all unite in
bidding the President of the United States
| and his estimable wife welcome to the State
of Indiana and to its capital city. This much
Grover Cleveland is the twenty second Pres
| ident of the United States. There are per-
sons living in this State who born be-
fore Washington, the first President, died;
some perhaps who were born while he was
yet President. Indiana then, and for long
time afterwards, wilderness Wash
ington was President of seventeen States and
of less than four millions of people. His sue
cessor of to-day is the President of thirty
eighth States and of more than sixty millions
of people. 1t is a striking and wonderful
tribute to the trainers of the Constitution that
it is found to fit the conditions of to-day as
we'll as it did those of hundred years ago,
and that the constitutional powers and duties
of Washington, who presided at the birth of
the Republic, were not more distinctly defined
than are those of the President who visits us
to-day. A large part of the strength and
safety of the country lies in q close adherence
TO these constitutional landmarks and limita
tons by both President and people.
The office of President is not only very
exalted position, but one of vast political
power. Notwithstanding constitutional linn
itations his power has necessarily grown with
the growth of the country and government.
The Constitution makes him for the Republic
what king is to an empire. For the term of
four years, perhaps eight, he is elective
king. every executive act" says Professor
E. A. Freeman, 'is his act; many things de-
pend wholly his personal pleasure; other
acts of his require the confirmation of the
Senate; still the Senate merely confirms,
and cannot act of itself; the act is
strictly the act of the President. The
President has his ministers; but they are
strictly his ministers, named by him and de-
pendent on him; they are his advisers and
agents, not his colleagues But in another
place the writer points out the legal
limitations of the Presidents power, and
wherein it differs from royal authority by
son of his relations to the people. "The main
difference between king and president
he says, sis that the President is distinctly
responsible to the law; that he may be judged
and deposed by a legal process, and that there
is nothing about him of that mysterious per-
sonal dignity which, in the minds of most
people, still hangs Sbout king. Whether
the powers of president are great or small,
he is simply a magistrate, to be obeyed with
in the range of his powers, but who is liable
to legal punishment if he outsteps them"
These remarks seem obvious and common
place enough, yet they worth remember
i
dent
he American people have, in the main,
been fortunate in their Presidents. From
Washington and some of the early incum-
bents Of the office to James K Polk, Franklin
Pierce and some of the later ones, is indeed a
long descent, but none of our Presidents have
proved bad or dangerous men. Andrew John
came nearest to this, and in his case it
probably more ignorance and obstinacy
than viciousness He did not mean to be as
bad or dangerous President as he really was
James Buchanan nearest to being dis
loyal of any of our Presidents, and perhaps in
his case it was more weakness and timidity
than disloyalty. But none of our Presidents
have been bad or dangerous men in the sense
of being selfshly ambitious, or plotting
against the welfare of the country. And, all
things considered, they have averaged well in
point of ability. A very intelligent foreign
critic says
''After all, it may be fairly asked whether
the average of the American Presidents is not
pretty much on a level with the average of
Ministers in the. constitutional states of
Europe. We must look at their acts, not at
their words; must allow for the natural
self-assertion of people at once young and
powerful; must remember that America
has not, like the nations of Europe, the ad-
vantage of the discipline provided by constant
friendly or hostile intercourse with surround
ing neiahbors equal terms. Looking fairly
at the case, we must say that really great men